Reply to comment

I appreciate the desire to communicate intent and judgment more effectively. But from the outside looking in, I can't join in the perception that the "old" L.A. Times design was broken. On the occasions I had a chance to read the printed paper, it looked -- and worked -- fine to me.

Maybe the redesign was inexpensive by Times standards but sometimes those "inside jobs" become the most expensive ones -- when you take into account what all the talented people like you could have done otherwise with the time spent on prototypes, meetings, consensus-building and implementation.

Still, I hope y'all prove me wrong.